Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I was tempted to get up and say that in my long experience as a Member, Governments generally have not tended to take account of specifics, but I am not going to say that. However, I do have a certain sympathy for the remarks of Senator Norris. I acknowledge that the Government has moved on this issue. It is an important acknowledgement by the Government of the breadth of the argument on all sides of the House on a Bill with which those of us on this side of the House are not altogether satisfied. We believe inherent flaws are contained in the Bill. It would be positive if the arguments put forward by Senator Zappone were to be included. However, Senator Bacik made a valid point about straitjacketing these measures and specifying that particular issues need to be looked at. I agree with her. I have been discussing with my colleague, Senator Power, how the use of the words "in particular" in the amendment carries some considerable weight in that it indicates an acceptance that a review of the operation of the Act should be carried out. Senator Zappone made an argument about what is required under this particular amendment.

Like Senator van Turnhout, my main motive in speaking is to get some clarity from the Government and the Minister of State on how he sees this review unfolding. The chances are that although the Minister of State will be in the House, he may not be the Minister of the day when this is coming up for review in two years time. I imagine his talents will have been widely recognised and he will have moved on upwards and whatever.